Thanks to all of you for your comments and for making the thread both interesting and enjoyable.
The overwhelming preference was obviously for coin #1, the NGC piece. It got my vote, too. I thought it had better color, luster, "skin" and eye-appeal, even if it was a bit weakly struck on parts of the eagle and had a few ticks there too (I learned of that from our office).
The PCGS coin is priced $325 higher, by the way. To me, this is a good example of how NGC coins can be superior to PCGS, quality-wise and still sell for less money. That, to me is value. And, the NGC quality advantage is not nearly as uncommon as some die-hard PCGS supporters/cheerleaders seem to think.
Outhaul, you said "Mark,
You'll have to send them to me so I can be certain. I promise I'll send them back"
I'm really sorry I didn't see your post earlier - I just sent them to someone else for the same purpose.
Joe, you said "I would place my order for a coin with the obverse of #1 and the reverse of #2.
Maybe NCS can do that for me."
NCS is good but not THAT good!
Jim, you said " #1 because it's nicer."
Are you trying to imply that #2 is meaner?
Lucy, you said "I prefer that both halfs be a 54 instead of 34!"
Shocking, simply shocking.
Spudmasher, you gave great advice when you said "and a great way to determine a coins quality is to look at as many as you can get your hands on. There is no substitution."
Gilbert, you said "Wow Mark, I've gotten to respond to 2 in a row"
Ok, that's it for you, buster - you're over your limit for this year!
Bill Jones, you made an excellent point when you said "Having said that I think this exercise is one more illustration that ANY collector who says he or she will collect ONLY PCGS or ONLY NGC coins is missing out on a lot of opportunities. Neither service is perfect, and both have slabbed some really nice and some really awful coins."
Elcontador, please feel free to speak your mind next time you disagree with a grade. Really, it's ok.
Mike, thanks for the pics and comparisons.
Don, you did not "pollute" the thread by giving grading opinions - I expected people would do that. Please take back that apology!
Okay, I guess I'm late to this thread. The only posts that I read were the two that I saw by Mark, so, I already know the grades. My opinions, however, will still be written-
I like coin number one much more than coin number two. Based simply on the images I would think coin number one was an MS66 and coin number two an MS65. We were told, though, that both coins graded the same so I would have to lean toward MS66 as the grade. This is done not because coin number two is so nice it deserves the grade, rather, I can't see coin number one being tagged MS65. I think both coins look completely original but I don't like the coffee spots on coin number two at all while I do like the peripheral, burnt-on streaky toning of coin number one. I also do not like what appears to be breaks in the luster on the eagle's feathers in coin number two, although I could believe that this is simply an artifact of the imaging process. The thing I like the most about either coin is the phlegmy toning of coin number one. I use the term "phlegmy" here not in a pejorative manner, rather, I use it to denote the type of toning that is often seen from coins that are broken out of original rolls. This is the toning that is on the end of the third large feather of the eagle's right wing and also on the end of nearly all the large feathers on the left wing. This toning is a mix of blue and yellow and looks translucent at some angles and transparent at others. It has the appearance of both phlegm and gorgeous originality. I would bet that the phlegm is also apparent on the streaky obverse. So, that's my take on it.
Oh, by the way, I would like to own coin number one but would not pay near the same money for coin number two.
Comments
The overwhelming preference was obviously for coin #1, the NGC piece. It got my vote, too. I thought it had better color, luster, "skin" and eye-appeal, even if it was a bit weakly struck on parts of the eagle and had a few ticks there too (I learned of that from our office).
The PCGS coin is priced $325 higher, by the way. To me, this is a good example of how NGC coins can be superior to PCGS, quality-wise and still sell for less money. That, to me is value. And, the NGC quality advantage is not nearly as uncommon as some die-hard PCGS supporters/cheerleaders seem to think.
Outhaul, you said "Mark,
You'll have to send them to me so I can be certain. I promise I'll send them back"
I'm really sorry I didn't see your post earlier - I just sent them to someone else for the same purpose.
Joe, you said "I would place my order for a coin with the obverse of #1 and the reverse of #2.
Maybe NCS can do that for me."
NCS is good but not THAT good!
Jim, you said " #1 because it's nicer."
Are you trying to imply that #2 is meaner?
Lucy, you said "I prefer that both halfs be a 54 instead of 34!"
Shocking, simply shocking.
Spudmasher, you gave great advice when you said "and a great way to determine a coins quality is to look at as many as you can get your hands on. There is no substitution."
Gilbert, you said "Wow Mark, I've gotten to respond to 2 in a row"
Ok, that's it for you, buster - you're over your limit for this year!
Bill Jones, you made an excellent point when you said "Having said that I think this exercise is one more illustration that ANY collector who says he or she will collect ONLY PCGS or ONLY NGC coins is missing out on a lot of opportunities. Neither service is perfect, and both have slabbed some really nice and some really awful coins."
Elcontador, please feel free to speak your mind next time you disagree with a grade. Really, it's ok.
Mike, thanks for the pics and comparisons.
Don, you did not "pollute" the thread by giving grading opinions - I expected people would do that. Please take back that apology!
I like coin number one much more than coin number two. Based simply on the images I would think coin number one was an MS66 and coin number two an MS65. We were told, though, that both coins graded the same so I would have to lean toward MS66 as the grade. This is done not because coin number two is so nice it deserves the grade, rather, I can't see coin number one being tagged MS65. I think both coins look completely original but I don't like the coffee spots on coin number two at all while I do like the peripheral, burnt-on streaky toning of coin number one. I also do not like what appears to be breaks in the luster on the eagle's feathers in coin number two, although I could believe that this is simply an artifact of the imaging process. The thing I like the most about either coin is the phlegmy toning of coin number one. I use the term "phlegmy" here not in a pejorative manner, rather, I use it to denote the type of toning that is often seen from coins that are broken out of original rolls. This is the toning that is on the end of the third large feather of the eagle's right wing and also on the end of nearly all the large feathers on the left wing. This toning is a mix of blue and yellow and looks translucent at some angles and transparent at others. It has the appearance of both phlegm and gorgeous originality. I would bet that the phlegm is also apparent on the streaky obverse. So, that's my take on it.
Oh, by the way, I would like to own coin number one but would not pay near the same money for coin number two.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
AAAAAUAUUUUUUGGGGHHHHH!!!!!!
well that's it, from now on, for me, it's pcgs & nothing else. ha!
K S